Back in March I posted a multi-part interview with Andy Stanley that focused on communication. That exchange generated a lot of conversation. Some of you helped to make the conversation profitable, and a few of you... well, not so much. Well, just after this past Easter I spoke with Andy again, this time for an interview to talk more about the issues of preaching and communication. Here is that conversation in two parts. I look forward to healthy, charitable dialog in the comments.

Ed:I had the privilege a few months ago to be visiting there at the church which kind of prompted me to begin this blog series... When you're preaching and when you're communicating, what is the goal that you have for the listener? What do you want them do, be, act, or change as you communicate with them?

Andy: Well, actually I think the list that you just gave me is the goal and I think it depends on the kind of sermon. And so, I think every communicator needs to step up to wherever he or she's communicating with a specific goal, and sometimes it is "I want them to know something," sometimes it is "I want them to do something," sometimes it is "I want them to change something." So, in 35 or 40 minutes of a lot of words coming out of my mouth, in my mind, there's always a specific goal. This past Sunday for us was Easter and I wanted our congregation to understand something. It wasn't an application sermon. It wasn't even a "here's something you've never thought of before" sermon. It was a "I want you to understand something" But I think that's going to shift with the topic and shift with whatever series a communicator's in. That's a good question.

Ed: You and Layne Jones coauthored the book, Communicating for a Change, and many people have found it very helpful. What do you think are some elements that pastors and communicators who are doing messages, what do they need to bring to the message so that people can experience or be motivated to experience that change?

Andy: I think a big part of it is passion. And I coach our communicators. Every week I'm in some sort of coaching environment with our communicators on staff, and one of the things I say to them frequently is I say, "Look, you've gotta imagine there's a 21-year-old guy that's sittin' two/thirds of the way back and he's givin' church one more shot. What, where in your message is the passion to reach out and grab that guy by the throat and say, 'You can't leave here without hearing or doing or understanding.'" And so, when it comes to change, I think it's one thing to look at our outlines and our, whatever script we have in front of us.

That's one thing, but I think we have to step up there with somebody in mind or a type of person in mind because, for me, that's what I think fuels me to communicate for change or to communicate for a life change or to communicate to understand something that's never been understood before. And in my world - and you've been around me enough to know - every once in a while, I pull my stool out to the front of the stage and just it on it as close to the edge of the stage I can and lean as far as I can into the audience, and that's sorta my visual way of saying, "Okay, look, if you forget everything else you've heard today, you got to know this one thing, you gotta hear this one thing." And I think from the stage, that's the compelling change part. Here's what's gotta change.

Ed:When you communicate, you're known and have really promoted and encouraged people to consider that one-point approach to really make it simple, make it clear, make it compelling. Why is that? Why one-point? Because many of us were taught to have these three points, four points. Why have you narrowed the focus down to one thing?

Andy: You know it's interesting, and I'll answer the question directly, but actually at Dallas Seminary, we studied Haddon Robinson's book on preaching which all of us have been exposed to or was a textbook, and the thing is, Haddon taught us to preach one-point messages. I mean, if you look at biblical preaching or you look at his text, he teaches "What's the one thing?" The problem is: nobody did it. Even when I was in seminary and we were using that book as a textbook, even in class, nobody drove us to, "Hey, what's your one thing?" So, I feel like I'm doing what I was taught to do in seminary because I felt like that was the model. But the thing I think - and I shared this in book - the thing that really turned a page for me was, when I was in seminary, I was invited to teach a chapel for a Christian high school and I had this really amazing message I thought, and that morning when I got, or actually it was the night before, as I was lookin' over my notes, I thought, "You know what? They don't care about any of this." I've got all this stuff and all this content. They're seniors and juniors and sophomores in high school. They have chapel every week. They don't care. And they're not gonna remember any of this. And I just felt compelled to say, "Okay, if they're only gonna remember one thing, which they probably won't remember anything, but if they're gonna remember one thing, what do I want it to be?" And I rewrote my whole message towards that one thing. And that was a defining moment for me in terms of preparation and communication and I've just sorta stuck with it since then.

Ed: How do you keep from just making up statements or points, finding scriptural footnotes to kinda make a predetermined point?

Andy: Well, for me, I really, really, really want the text to speak for itself. And there have been so many times I've gone into my preparation with an idea in mind, come out on the other end with a completely different idea, and I really to the best of my ability, I want the text to speak. And I think once we've done our due diligence in terms of really, really, really doin' our textual work, using the languages, usin' the helps, whatever a man or woman or uses to prepare, I think from that, that' where we ask the question, "Okay, what's the thing the author is tryin' to communicate? What's the thing God was tryin' to illustrate through this story? What's the idea that comes out of this narrative?" So, I really think it's all in the text, but it just takes a long time sometimes to get there. And as I've told our staff and I tell my wife frequently, sometimes it's really not until Saturday night or even sometimes Sunday morning when it finally dawns on me, this is the thing that I've gotta carry with me to the platform today. So, it's hard work, for me anyway.

Ed: Well, like you said, "I want the text to speak for itself." What do you say to people that say, "Well, Andy, if you want the Text to speak for itself, just work through it verse by verse"? What are the advantages and disadvantages of that, and how do you come down there?

Andy: Well, I think anyone who listens, not to a sermon I've preached, but anyone who listens to a bunch of sermons I preach know that I, my favorite thing is to take a passage and to work through a passage word by word, verse by verse. I love to do that. That's what I was trained to do. So, I think on any given Sunday, I preach exegetically. What I don't do is pick up where I left off last week with the very next verse. Now, I've done that through the book of Jonah, done that to the book of Nehemiah, but typically, we're picking a topic, and then I'm picking passages that I think speak to that topic, and then I'm exegeting those passages.

I think preaching verse-by-verse through books of the Bible is a fun thing to do. I love listening to that kind of teaching. That's actually how I do my quiet times. My quiet time is verse by verse, take as long as I need to to work through a book of the Bible and write down insights and observations, but in terms of what happens on a Sunday morning, as I'm lookin' at my audience and as I look at the Text, even the writers of the Text don't give equal weight to everything, and verses, I mean, and these books of the Bible, especially the epistles, were written to be read holistically.

I think when I get to heaven, Paul is gonna say, "Wow, you found a whole lot more in there than I originally said because I meant for somebody to stand up and read the whole book of Ephesians at one time to the local church, and gosh, you spent six weeks pickin' through there." So, I think sometimes, if we're not careful, we miss what the author's trying to say because we spend so much time on three or four sentences that the author said as they made their entire argument. And honestly, I think that's a little dangerous, and I think both of us would agree and everybody listening to your podcast would agree, we have heard preachers and communicators make more of Text than the author originally intended because they decided, "I'm only gonna cover these five verses or these six verses this particular Sunday." And I think we can actually miss the message of the author doing that sometimes.

But I do wanna say, I don't think it's a wrong way to preach or an inadequate way to preach. And obviously, John McArthur and others have made a career and have built very, very mature believers and very strong churches around working through books of the Bible over and over. So there's, it's just a preference thing I guess.
And there seems to be a bit of resurgence of that.

Part 2b will drop later in the week. In the mean time jump into the meta and share your thoughts and practices concerning preaching in ways that connect the truth to the people God has sent you to.

In part four of our interview with Andy Stanley he shares his thoughts on the "hard work" of preaching and improvement - including the painful process of personal review and evaluation. In case you missed them, here are parts one, two, and three. Be sure to get a copy of Andy's book, Communicating for a Change.

Question: Andy, you make preaching look so easy. How hard do you work at being an effective communicator?

Andy: I listen to my own CD's all the time. In fact, on some Sundays I listen to all three services. And I want to get better and better, and I work on getting better. I listen for dumb habits that I have. I sometimes watch my own videos, which is horrible. That will either make you better or want to get out of ministry completely. I think I make it look easy, but it's not. I work very, very hard.

And every sermon I think, "What if this is it? What if this is the last time I preach?" And I psych myself up with that thought every single week. I want it to be the best sermon that has ever been preached by anyone anywhere. That is an unattainable goal and nobody cares. No one is giving out awards for that. But I just feel that all these people that got up and fought traffic and they got their kids here and they found a seat...I need to give them something that makes it worth all that. Why anyone would want to come to our 10:30 a.m. service? You must be starving. People are going to go through all that, and they are going to bring unchurched friends. They need to go home with something, just one simple thing. And I don't think I am successful every single time, but it is the goal every single time.

I ask our communicators all the time, "What is the one thing they've got to know? They may have three pages of notes, but what is the one sentence, idea, or phrase they have got to know? That's the thing. That's the take-away." So preaching with that kind of burden, bringing that kind of burden to the communication process is huge.

What do you do to continue to refine and improve your preaching?

I knew the interview we did with Andy Stanley was good, and that it would be helpful and provocative. That certainly makes it blog-worthy. As I posted Part 2 of the interview where Andy shares some thoughts on preaching "verse-by-verse" through books of the Bible I knew it would generate a lot of discussion. But I find myself disappointed at some of the responses.

Some agreed and thought the interview was great. Thanks for coming by and commenting. I think many disagreed in a gracious and thoughtful way. That's good as well. But, many just make their typical drive-by comments and never took the time to learn from Andy. And, having listened to much of what is called "expository preaching" today but is really running commentary, some need to listen to Andy's ideas on communication.

I am disappointed that some people cannot dialogue about issues. I am not saying that about everyone's comments, but I will tell you it is amazing how quickly some decide they cannot learn from another because they disagree. I've already blogged on this, so let me just say I believe that we have a lot to learn from each other in the church.

You may not agree with how Andy Stanly preaches. That is fine. He can handle it. He is doing just fine.

But, it appears that many in the church believe that if you're not preaching verse-by-verse it isn't biblical preaching at all. That is an unfortunate conclusion that rules out so many great preachers in throughout church history; just about everyone before John Chrysostom, and for that matter, every recorded sermon in the Bible.

Now, I have written extensively on my view of preaching, in at least three books, several magazine, etc. So, I won't rehash that here. But, a few comments may be helpful.

Yes, Andy is right, there are no verse-by-verse sermons in the Bible. Not a one. You cannot make the case that there is verse-by-verse exposition in the scripture. The Nehemiah reference and the Lukan account of Jesus "explaining the scriptures" are grasping at straws to prove a preconceived notion. It is a serious case of eisegesis and I find it incredibly ironic that those who are most passionate about Biblical exegesis are so ready to read into their Bibles something that is not there.

Look, the reason I believe in verse-by-verse, expository preaching is not because it is "in" the text, but because of what the text "is." Though I do not only preach verse-by-verse, I preach exegetical, expository, text-driven messages because the text (Scripture) is inerrant, inspired, profitable, etc. and I need to teach the Bible, not my views with the Bible as scriptural footnotes proving common sense thoughts.

I was working late last night on my next message in my Ephesians series. Why? Because I want to teach faithfully the truths of Scripture to my congregation. But, I am also working on ways to be sure they know it is important-- and Andy Stanley helps me know how to do help them see it is as important as I believe it is.

The Bible is relevant in this and every culture. We do not need to make it relevant. However, I do believe we need to help people understand that it is relevant and how to apply it to their lives. And, Andy provides great insight of that process.

But those of you who believe that verse-by-verse preaching is the only valid form of preaching need to decide if those who do not are "allowed." Will those who hold such view be attacked for holding them rather than engaged with a disagreement?

For many in the comments and at other places on the web, it seems that preaching like the early Church Fathers or Spurgeon (to cite just two examples), makes you not a "real" preacher. That is a shame.

If there is no room for the topical preacher, particularly one who seeks to bring people to the Word of God faithfully apply the word to an important issue, allowing the word of God to provide God's direction on that topic, then you have just eliminated doctrinal preaching and dismissed the historic examples of doctrinal preaching throughout the history of the church. And, you will have an incredibly difficult time partnering with people inside existing denominations and in broader evangelicalism.

And I fear that some of you will continue to isolate yourselves in a ghetto of people who say they love the word, but in many cases are not communicating it well to anyone except other believers already passionate about the doctrine you preach.

I get that Andy's comment about "cheating" is provocative (and he intended it as such), but it was not demeaning. I wish I could say the same about all of the comments about his comment. Many of you have shown scorn, rather than disagreement, and I believe you need to change the way you speak of those with whom you disagree.

Andy has written more about his view of preaching in his book, Communicating for Change, and you should read it-- a blog interview does not say everything a person believes on an certain issue. Having been reared under Charles Stanley and trained at Dallas Seminary, I think he has some awareness of how verse-by-verse teaching works.

And, I do think that Andy is on to something-- verse-by-verse preachers are sometimes cheating and can be lazy. Hear me on this. I'm not saying they aren't working hard to study and put together a sermon, but many stop there and do not push on into the even harder work of making the truth comprehensible. It's cheating to develop a sermon only well enough to be understood by the people who agree with you. It's lazy to not put the time into making the truths we believe comprehensible. We all need to hear Andy, even if you disagree with him.

Of course, I also think there are lot of topical preachers who are cheating too, but that is another story for another day.

Anyway, I have an open blog and allow open comments (none of which have been edited or deleted so far), but I think we can do better.

Thanks to many of you who are Reformed (or not Reformed but feel strongly about verse-by-verse preaching) who took the time to read Andy's thoughts an interact with them, rather than posting (at times) bizarre comments about how everyone who preaches differently has practically abandoned the faith. I appreciate the thoughtful comments and I appreciate you.

My hope still remains that there are enough mature people out there who can learn from others and that will become more evident as we work through the rest of the series in the coming days.

Again, my thanks to Andy for being so gracious and letting John and I do the interview in the first place.

My next post will continue the series "Andy Stanley on communication."

I am teaching at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School all day and won't be able to interact in the comments, but don't let that stop you for doing so. ;-)

If you missed the first post in this series, be sure to go back and read the introduction and Andy's philosophy of preaching. We had some good discussion on that post, and I am guessing we'll have even more on this one.

This five part interview reflects some of what you'll find in Andy's book, Communicating for a Change. It's a good book that should be read by anyone who speaks, teaches or preaches.

The book is actually number one in three different categories on Amazon.com right now. From Amazon:
Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,967 in Books
Popular in these categories: (What's this?)
#1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Evangelism > Preaching
#1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Christian Living > Leadership
#1 in Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Evangelism > Sermons